App Build
Your Build Team takes the approved PRD through requirements, architecture, sprint planning, build, and test — with your approval at every gate.
Explore App Build →Tell your Product Manager what you need in plain English. They read your actual codebase, draft a structured Product Requirement Document (PRD) grounded in your real architecture, and your Senior PM challenges it for gaps. By the time your Build Team starts, the spec is tight — and you haven't built the wrong thing.
Your PM reads your actual codebase before drafting — so the PRD references real architecture, not generic advice. Your Senior PM challenges it, and you review across multiple rounds. This is not one-shot generation.
Describe what you want in plain English. Two sentences is enough. You don't need to write requirements — that's your team's job.
Your PM reads your actual codebase and drafts a structured, code-aware PRD that references your real services, patterns, and integration points.
Your Senior PM reviews the draft for gaps, feasibility, and completeness — and sends it back where it falls short.
Your PM and Senior PM iterate back and forth, tightening the spec until the bar is met. Each round closes gaps the previous one missed.
You review the PRD across as many rounds as it takes. Request changes with context, or move it forward.
The approved PRD feeds directly into the App Build pipeline. The spec your Build Team starts from is tight.
Your PM writes. Your Senior PM challenges. You decide. A PRD nobody argued with is a PRD nobody checked.
Not a prompt dump. A structured document your Build Team can execute against — and you can hand to a contractor next year without explaining anything.
Scope is locked before any code is written. What's in, what's out, what this feature is for. No scope creep. No "I thought we were also doing X." The boundaries are written down and you approved them.
Measurable targets with baselines. Anti-goals that tell the team what not to build. No more arguing about whether the feature is "ready" or gold-plating something that was supposed to ship last week.
Every requirement is numbered, testable, and carries acceptance criteria attached directly to it. When your Build Team picks up this spec, there is nothing to interpret. It either passes or it doesn't.
An inventory of what already exists in your codebase — each with a disposition: extend it, replace it, or leave it alone. Your Build Team reuses your patterns instead of creating parallel implementations you'll spend a week untangling.
Every round of your Senior PM's review is recorded — what was challenged, what was fixed, what was deferred. You're not blindly trusting AI output. You can read the argument that made the spec better.
You bring the intent. Your Product Team brings the structure, the edge cases, and the code-awareness.
"Add password reset via email. Users should get a link that expires after 30 minutes. Rate limit it."
What this is, who it's for, what bounds it, and how you'll know it works.
The rules and behaviours in plain English — what users can do, what the system must guarantee. The Build Team decomposes these into stories; the PRD stays at the WHAT.
Unknown inputs, expired states, repeated requests, failure modes — surfaced and named before any story is written.
References to your real services, existing patterns, and integration points — so the build reuses, not reinvents.
Your Build Team takes the approved PRD through requirements, architecture, sprint planning, build, and test — with your approval at every gate.
Explore App Build →Your Incident Team investigates every root cause, not just the first plausible one. Two approval gates before any code changes.
Explore Bug Fix →Sign up for beta access. Tell us what you're building and we'll be in touch.
Takes 2 minutes. We review every sign-up.